Approaching Theory: Scholar and Practitioner

Abstract

The relationship between theory and practice—theorists and practitioners—is a tenuous one, full of contradictions and mistrust, both in the United States and beyond. Theory is generally seen as the prerogative of the scholar. Practice, on the other hand, is bound up with the artists and the artistic output. Many scholars feel that they do not necessarily need the practice to theorize or produce scholarly work. Many artists may feel that theory or scholarship is not important for their specific field. Some people contest the mere idea that one person can combine both scholarly and practical/artistic work and question if one can truly activate two halves of the brain at once. Nevertheless, the most exciting developments in theatre in the twentieth century came exactly from the interaction of theory with practice, often combined in the same person or group of persons. This interaction of theory and practice is demonstrated and documented in plays, manifestos, treatises, paintings, eyewitness accounts, histories, case studies, videos, audios, and reviews. These marriages were never easy and were filled with challenges and tensions within the theorists/practitioners themselves as well their relationship with the outside world. All the same, we find numerous examples that suggest that theory and practice are more inherently connected than is often assumed. This article gives a general overview of the historical relationship between theory and practice and will end with some personal reflections on how I see the relationship between scholarship and practice in my own work in theatre for young audiences.